The State Worker

Several readers have forwarded copies of an e-mail -- see below --  that is making the rounds of state offices like a lightning strike this afternoon.

Readers are asking The State Worker if it's true that they can get unemployment insurance when the third furlough day kicks in later this month. 

The answer is: We're not sure.  And as with all things UI related, it's complicated.

Loree Levy, spokeswoman for the Employment Development Department, said her people are aware of the e-mail circulating among state departments, agencies and commissions.

"We are working up a response now.  The additional furlough day is a new development, and we're trying to quickly assess what it might mean in terms of the UI program," Levy told us in a speedy e-mail reply.

"I hope to be able to get you something a little later in the afternoon, in about an hour or so," Levy added, saying the e-mail wasn't written by EDD officials but the link to the form is genuine.

Check back later and we'll tell you what we find out. 

Here's the e-mail that's making the rounds. 

Subject: Can State Employees Really Apply for Unemployment Because of Furloughs?

Dear State Employee:  If a person works permanent full-time, the law states that he or she can apply for unemployment benefits if his or her working hours are cut by more than 10%. The way to do this is to fill out the form on the site below, and forward it to your personnel department. From personnel, it will go to EDD and then to the feds. Fill out your name and SSN at the top of the page and answer the questions at the bottom. Question A should be the only one for most of you, to which you should answer "yes due to furlough cuts". Please send this to others who may be interested as well.

http://www.edd.ca.gov/pdf_pub_ctr/de2063.pdf

State worker Pepper Lewis floated a trial balloon this week after the governor imposed a third furlough day each month on thousands of state workers.

With everybody hurting, especially couples where husband and wife are both employed by the state, she wondered what people might do to address their own personal budget gap.

How about a car wash run by state workers for state workers, held at gas stations where state workers buy a lot of gas statewide? Lewis suggested in an email to SEIU bosses.

Here are excerpts from Lewis' email:

We need money for our mortgages, cable bills, groceries, makeup, student loans, pet food, clothing, etc., and my husband and I both work for the State of California and we are both stewards.

I love physically active, hard work and would enjoy making $100-$200 on a furlough Friday, washing cars at a gas station sympathetic to my situation. Many state workers buy gas, we frequent these businesses, and I can find several business owners who would love to have responsible, mature, ethical, educated, team players washing cars and keeping the money for our expenses.

 I am tired of doing without my paycheck since February. We have lost a total of $500 per month, now the bleeding heart liberals and the conservative "no new taxes" folks cannot agree to compromise and sign our contract.

 Instead of us picketing, eating ice cream, crying, panicking, we need to do what President Obama said, we need to do what we did before the 'government' came along and gave us everything: we need to be entrepreneurs and make our own money providing a service people need. Dog walking, house cleaning, tutoring, baby sitting, lawn mowing, hair braiding, pan handling, performing street theatre, something.

Anyone want to join me? It'll be nice and hot. The cold water from the hoses will feel refreshing.

Let's hear your ideas on how to make up your own budget gap. Maybe you've already taken a part-time job and or cut spending. What's next for you?

The Professional Engineers in California Government say they're preparing a legal challenge to stop the Schwarzenegger administration from imposing a third furlough day a month on its members during the budget crisis.

PECG spokeswoman Lisa-Marie Burcar said union officials aren't yet sure what form the legal challenge will take - lawsuit, grievance or some kind of arbitration.

But the union representing engineers said a third furlough day will stall government  infrastructure projects needed to create jobs and bolster California's economy.

"Telling people to stay home a third day a month slows economic recovery," PECG president Mark Sheahan said in a statement announcing the lawsuit.

Sheahan expressed concern that with state engineers furloughed three days a month, work may have to be outsourced to private companies "at more than twice the cost."

 "This executive order mandates the waste that the governor says he wants to eliminate,"  Sheahan added.

Sheahan noted that 95 percent of PECG's members are paid through special funds, such as the gas tax, federal funds, and other sources - not the general fund.

"Cutting our pay won't help the general fund, but it will cost the taxpayers more than twice as much (if the state has to outsource)," Sheahan added.

PECG's prior lawsuit and grievance to stop the Schwarzenegger administration's initial two-day furloughs are working their way through the courts and administrative process.

Prior posts about the ongoing legal dispute can be read by clicking here  and  here.

In ordering most state workers to take three furlough days a month beginning July 10, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger also reinstituted a plan for closing down most state offices on Fridays.

Administration officials said their reasons were twofold: It would be logistically difficult to manage self-directed furloughs three days a month, and closing offices would also save on building operation costs.

The order says the state Department of Personnel will direct state offices to close the first, second and third Friday of every month through June 2010. 

For a list of offices that will remain open click here. 

Meg Whitman, the Republican gubernatorial candidate, is on a swing through the Bakersfield area, fundraising and giving interviews to at least some newspapers.

On Wednesday, the former chief executive officer of eBay Inc. chatted with reporters and editors from The Bakersfield Californian.

You will recall that Whitman has told separate crowds in Orange County and Roseville that she would cut 30,000 state jobs, but offered little detail.

Now, she's elaborated on her plan - even as thousands of Service Employee International Union workers descend on the Capitol today for a lunchtime rally to protest budget and service cuts the state must make to cut its deficit.

Whitman's target? Middle-management, judging by her remarks.

"I would streamline the number of bureaucrats who work in the government. There's at least 17,000 mid-level bureaucrats that, I think, need to go because we have a government we cannot afford," Whitman told The Californian.

To see Whitman's more detailed Q & A with the newspaper, conducted at the Grimmway Farms carrot processing facility in Arvin, southeast of Bakersfield, click right here.

So folks, what do you think? Our bet is that state service would be badly damaged by reductions of that magnitude.  But we'd like to hear your views. 

What would you tell Whitman about her plan?

The union that represents faculty members in the California State University system has launched a nasty counterattack against CSU Chancellor Charles B. Reed and his plan to furlough professors two days a month to save $275 million.

The California Faculty Association issued a blistering statement attacking Reed's budget cutting furlough plan after The State Worker reported Tuesday that Reed had pressed the union to put his furlough proposal to a vote by its members. 

Read that post here.   

The CFA's response was quick - and the tone was downright nasty.

"Chancellor Reed and his administration have focused for years on their own perks, spent millions on labor consultants and done little to advocate for adequate CSU funding; now their incomplete CSU budget proposal would address less than half the projected shortfall, leaving a $300 million deficit with no plan to close it; tens of thousands of students are at risk of losing out on a college education.

"Would you buy a "pig in a poke" -- in this case, a pay cut deal composed of vague promises about what is inside the paper bag? CFA won't.

The CFA said it's well aware of the massive budget collapse that the California University system is facing with the rest of the state and the union acknowledged that this coming year's state funding shortfall will be worse.

"So we expected to see a creative, well-thought-out plan from our leadership. Chancellor Reed's administration has long been raising its own compensation and packing the ranks of managers because, they claimed, they need the best at the top. Well, this is their time to shine," CFA President Lillian Taiz said in a statement.

"Instead, they have come up with a half-baked plan to cut employee pay that ostensibly would address a little less than half the funding shortfall. And, when asked about the remaining $300 million deficit, our Chancellor said he 'has no plan,'"Taiz said.

The CFA boss then said Reed's Monday statement misrepresented its talks with CFA.

The union said CSU brass omitted the most important questions it asked about the Chancellor's proposal that basically asks for a blank check to deal with the crisis.

The question? If CSU faculty agrees to a furlough, will that prevent layoffs?

The CFA says the answer it got was a resounding "No" from senior CSU university executives, many of whom earn more than $300,000 a year and live rent-free in university owned homes and are supplied university-issued cars. 

California State University Chancellor Charles B. Reed is publicly pressing leaders of the California Faculty Association to let members of their union vote on a proposal to take two furlough days a month as part of $584 million in budget cuts.

In a statement posted on CSU's web site, Reed said his officials have met with the faculty union three times to discuss furloughs.

But CFA has yet to schedule anything so members can vote on the proposal. 

Reed appears to be getting impatient with CFA, judging by a message he posted on CSU's Web site, which you can read in its entirety by clicking here.

"We have provided answers to the questions posed by the CFA during our last meeting, and are urging them to present the furlough option to their members for a vote. We need to move forward to address the massive budget cuts that the system is facing before the impacts are magnified," Reed said.

"The CSU is facing an unprecedented crisis and it will take cooperation and shared sacrifice from all of us to get through this next fiscal year and beyond," Reed added.

There are about 23,000 faculty members in the CSU.

CSU said it proposed furloughs to all of its labor unions as a way to address an anticipated $584 million cut, or 13 percent reduction, to CSU's 2009-10 budget.

If adopted by all the unions, furloughs could cut CSU's salary expenditures by about $275 million. CSU said it's eying other spending cuts to cover the rest of the budget gap.

Collective bargaining agreements between the CSU and its employee unions include provisions covering mandated non-retention and layoffs, but not furloughs. Each bargaining unit, therefore, must agree to negotiate furloughs, Reed said.

So far, only two --the California State University Employees Union (CSUEU) representing 16,000 non-academic employees and the Academic Professionals of California (APC) representing 2,400 student service employees-- have agreed to talk furloughs.

Reed's putting his money where his mouth is: on June 5, he already introduced a series of changes to CSU regulations that could pave the way for furloughs and salary reductions among CSU management and executive personnel.

To see the proposed regulations for executive furloughs, click here. 

IMAGE: Chancellor Charles B. Reed, California State University Photo

With one of the year's biggest long weekends looming, the California Highway Patrol says officers will keep close tabs on revelers and do everything possible to keep roads safe.

The Independence Day long weekend is huge for the 7,600 uniformed officers who make up the state's highway police force.

 All available CHP officers will be on the road to help keep the fireworks where they belong - in the sky, CHP Commissioner Joe Farrow said in a hews release.

Last year, 41 people died on California's roadways, Farrow noted, with nearly half of those killed in CHP jurisdiction not wearing seat belts at the time of the crash.

Long before the long weekend arrives, the CHP may spark some fireworks of its own.

We still don't know what the California Association of Highway Patrolmen's raise will be for the 2009-2010 fiscal year, a figure usually announced before now.

Neither CHP spokeswoman Fran Clader nor Department of Personnel Administration spokeswoman Lynelle Jolley was able to say today  if CHP officers get a raise. 

The CAHP's contract calls for its officers'  wages to automatically adjust in July, using an average calculated from the results of a salary survey of five big law enforcement agencies around the state.

The city police  agencies included in the survey are Oakland, San Francisco, San Diego and Los Angeles, along with the Los Angeles County Sheriff.

The CAHP has suffered none of the furloughs forced upon other state workers. 

For that reason alone, even a modest raise could trigger a lot of anger and outcry.

 

We were traveling on a Southwest flight last week and our ears perked up.

An articulate state attorney sitting behind us started complaining about how her colleagues in other agencies are knowingly abusing their state vehicle privileges, using their work-assigned cars and trucks to run personal errands and trips on the taxpayer dime.

Downright refreshing, though not necessarily true. Or is it?

The attorney, it seems, is not the only one worried about what taxpayers see and think as the newer model state cars and trucks idle at a bank or zip into the supermarket parking lot.

The Department of General Services released an annual update of its fleet vehicle handbook for state workers last month.

To read it, click here.  It included this gem of a warning, always worth repeating:

The operation of a state vehicle is a highly visible activity that deserves the attention of each state agency.

The public's awareness of state vehicles and their concern about proper use has been heightened by the current economic situation.

 The booklet continues:

State agencies and all state employees are responsible for knowing and following state fleet rules, including, but not limited to the following:

1. State motor vehicles shall be used only in the conduct of state business.

2. Commuting in state vehicles is allowed only in compliance with specific guidelines and all costs must be reimbursed to the state.

3. A Home Storage Permit is required if a state vehicle is frequently kept overnight at or in the vicinity of an employee's home.

4. Carrying in the vehicle any persons other than those directly involved with official state business is prohibited unless permission is obtained in advance for each trip by the employee's supervisor.

5. State agencies and employees are responsible for properly reporting personal use of state provided vehicles, considered compensation by the Internal Revenue Service and Franchise Tax Board.

6. Smoking in state vehicles is prohibited.

Now, we often hear the claim that home storage permits are abused.

The occasional case even surfaces in state auditor reports.

So tell me, state workers, is the abuse of home storage permits uncommon, as we suspect, or is the reality far different?

The pain caused by free falling state tax revenues is spreading beyond California.

In Hawaii, Governor Linda Lingle wants to furlough her state workers three days a month until 2011. 

The unions are challenging the plan in court.  A hearing is expected this week.

Gov. Lingle is grappling with a $688 million budget shortfall after already trimming $2 billion from her state's budget.

She vows that if her plan to furlough that state's 15,600 state workforce starting July 1 is nixed by the court, she will issue at least 2,500 layoff notices soon afterward.

At least three of the four state employee unions have gone to court to stop her plan, saying that the proposed furloughs are illegal and violate the state's constitution.

For details about the Hell in Hawaii, click here to read a Honolulu Star-Bulletin report.

Then, click here for an Associated Press report that suggests the battle between Lingle and her state worker unions could "literally come down to a trio of sentences in an obscure state labor statute."